Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heather Pick

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Clear cut no consensus here, there is plenty of non-local sourcing avaliable, and being a obituary (which it isn't) isn't a reason for deleting. AFD is not a vote Secret ^account 23:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heather Pick[edit]

No evidence of notability has been established. No citations of any kind have been provided. Previous suggestions for speedy deletion or standard deletion have been deleted without comment by unidentified users. Ultimately, this is a woman with a regular job who had the misfortune to pass away ahead of her time. Sadly, this happens to many people and it provides no particular notability.--Tailkinker (talk) 22:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I do not believe this meets notability standards. A morning news anchor who supported cancer awareness after her diagnosis is simply not enough. I am not diminishing her accomplishments or impact on her viewing audience, simply that Wiki has standards for inclusion and this woman does not meet them. OneHappyHusky (talk) 23:05, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article is a fine obituary, but it doesn't suggest any notability for an encyclopedia entry. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ - unless she has some journalism background that can be added. That might get her into the notable range. -WarthogDemon 23:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep - for reasons stated by User:Umbralcorax. -WarthogDemon 23:15, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep- I'm torn. On one hand, I get what nom's saying. On the other hand, I did find some reliable sources about this woman and her passing: [1], [2], [3], [4] and potentially less reliable ones like this: [5]. Offhand, I'd say she achieved some local notability because of her illness and her passing, and that the article should probably be kept. Umbralcorax (talk) 23:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - a figure of purely local interest, with no particular claim to notability in her field. Biruitorul ^Talk 04:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Still Delete What User: Biruitorul said so succinctly is what I meant to say but in too many words.OneHappyHusky (talk) 06:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This person does not meet the standards for notability - the combination of her dying from breast cancer and being a morning news anchor is insufficient. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.231.88.7 (talk) 14:51, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve. "Notability" is not something that can be "established." There are varying degrees of notability. Umbralcorax has provided evidence of notability. There is also an article by Tim Feran in The Columbus Dispatch[6], a later article by Tim Feran in The Columbus Dispatch[7], an obituary in the Associated Press[8], an article in The Rockford Register Star[9], and several more articles can be found via Google News. A TV news anchor, being a public figure, does not have a "regular job." It looks like she worked for ten years at WREX-TV [10] and several years at WBNS-TV. This woman is obviously notable in Illinois and Ohio. This says in February 2008 readers of The Columbus Dispatch Online picked Heather Pick as their favorite local TV personality. Also, "She was honored by the Illinois Associated Press for a documentary on breast cancer survivors."[11] If "local interest" was a reason to delete, Wikipedia wouldn't have any articles about villages in Romania or towns in Moldova. Having said all that, if her husband or someone close to her says they want the article gone, I say delete it. --Pixelface (talk) 21:54, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- as the original nominator for speedy deletion, I believe this article can be speedily deleted. While as a fellow broadcast journalist, I am saddened by her passing, this is, by no means, a ticket to an article here. At the end of the day, Pick is just a normal broadcast journalist, working for one television station in a country with hundreds of television stations. Mindful of such, she is only one of many people who died from Cancer every year, nowhere near having enough notability to have an article here. I know it is a sad story, but emotions cannot be the reason to having an article here. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 23:04, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Merge You get someone who watches 10tv and ask them who Heather Pick is, they will know exactly who you are talking about. Heather Pick was notable in Central Ohio, especially for her courage to still continue to be a news anchor during her breast cancer. She even tried on wigs during a broadcast, and last night, 10tv make a whole broadcast about her and Breast Cancer awareness. Not everyone knows who Robert Hyde Greg is, yet this dude has his article. Many family members and friends of Heather Pick is devastated and I think that they would agree that Heather Pick deserves an article. If someone happens to look in a category of those who fought breast cancer, they might click "Heather Pick" and say, "wow, interesting" and add more information. How common is it that a news reporter with a terminal illness still continues doing her job with that illness? Keep this article. Look on 10tv's website and it may help you change your mind about this wonderful woman. At least merge with the WBNS article.--Xxhopingtearsxx (talk) 22:44, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep seem notable,plus sources to back the article up.--MarkusBJoke (talk) 18:37, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.